iv'a worn smith

Yes, why don't we just be a little selective in citing examples. James Brayshaw!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Citing the Port example in fact backs up what I am saying. They acted swiftly and clinically. Note the difference in them this year????

Point taken UH, but right now, we just need mids with some grunt. Remember his games last year, I think he gave us more value than what we have with most of the guys named this year.

I don't recall anyone saying Sugar had to make a "public" comment, but a message to members about the way forward might be reasonable? That said, Daisycutter asked the question: "How many Directors (excl President) of other AFL clubs do you hear making public comments?" My answer to that would be not many............... until the proverbial hits the fan. At times like those, at least at other clubs who go through crises, they come out with all guns blazing. Stand strong.

Hip and Shoulder raises a valid question. He is the Football Director and our Football at present is Schizen.

Unlike Caro, WJ is not a highly paid journo. Forgive me if I am wrong WJ. Other than stating "sources close to the club", Caro did not come up with a scintilla of hard evidence. She put the elephant in the room, no-one else did and she did it in an effort to enhance her waning standing in the media. Once this happened, the AFL had to be seen to be proactive. We were the sacrificial lambs. Now, to use the word "unsubstantiated" and not apply it equally to journos like Caro is to ignore simple reality. As someone said sometime ago on D/Land and did so cogently, journalists are in the media. They ought MEDIAte news and distill the facts, not extrapolate it for their own ends. It is when such rigour lacks in journalism, that an article printed in the mainstream media becomes the story, not the substance of what they write, which they claim to be the story. A pox on all their houses I say.

Magner on the rookie list = Gillies, Rodan, Byrne and Pederson on the main list. Go figure. Apologies for not doing this on the topic in question, but I couldn't resist.

I tend to agree.............. sadly

I understand UH, but as I said, I am not saying the issue is all down to Mark Neeld. I simply say, there is a serious problem which is deep seated within the club and it needs to be fixed and I for one do not want to wait for yet another end of year review. As I said on another thread, I do not believe the playing list we have, including the midfield is as bad as our performances suggest. Something is very wrong, and it is incumbent on the administration to fix it now. Simply put, the players are not buying in. WHY????

And what exactly might that be? I have been waiting a long time for the so called, "cultural change" List management mistakes accepted, I do not believe the current list is as bad as the results have indicated.

The debate will continue, but the facts are this. We were smashed in the possession count, we chased arse for most of the day, the opposition found it very easy to run into space and if the Lions had kicked straight in the the 2nd quarter, it would have been all over at half time. It pains me that there are so many who readily accept mediocrity. I cannot say for certain that the problem is solely down to Mark Neeld, but whatever the problem maybe, it is becoming so chronic, the time may have passed for a cure. It is up to the administration, to identify the problem, put a strategy in place and bloody well fix it. In today's modern football world, you will be eaten up if you can't or won't lift your standards.

The greatest crime that the MFC (Schwab) committed was not the strategy which believed that gaining round one draft picks would be a panacea, but a failure to develop what we had/have on our list during the period concerned. We are now reaping what we sowed back then. That is the only thing Caro has got right.

Unlike some, at least he has one.

Our cause isn't helped when you bring in the likes of Rodan, who clearly wasn't in Port's plans and leave someone like Magner on the rookie list.

This is even better. Oh the memories!!!!!!!!!!

I have no problem with that HT, but when it suits him, behind the scenes, he still puts his 2 bobs worth in.

No he didn't. The Ox clearly said he would take a seat on the Board if it was considered appropriate. Otherwise, he would be willing to take on any support role within the footy club and outside the board. The word "temporary" was never mentioned by him.

McLardy performance in this presser is not good.

Alf, None of us can be sure, but the rumblings about his in house performance have been going on for too long. Sure, we can only guess, but from what I have gathered from sources close to the club, he spends far too much time involved in football matters not strictly administration matters. From what I understand, that is at the root of the unrest within the club regarding the performance of CS.

That is patently obvious HT, but he is a media performer after all. Given his chosen career path he should make editorial comment without fear or favour. Once again, my view is he added nothing of substance to the debate last night, other than saying he could not get involved, doesn't want to get involved and it is time for someone else to do something.

Well, he's not cut out for a role with the MFC, then I presume he is a "media performer". He sat bolt upright, clearly uncomfortable and allowed his 3 colleagues to make the comments they chose to make. He added nothing to the entire segment really. Garry is conflicted and not handling it very well at all.

And there is a well credentialled school of thought that claims CS was the main architect of the football department as we knew it then and now

Makes sense, he was about as animated as a cardboard cut out last night. If Garry is not cut out for it, then he should stop the Chinese whispers behind the scenes, which he does engage in. Fair dinkum, a former captain of the club, in modern history and doesn't want to be involved with the very place that gave him his launching pad into media "stardom"?

Jason Dunstall, Dermott Brereton, David Koch. High media profiles, but commit to their footy clubs. So tell me again Garry. What's the problem? Sorry, if you gave your reasons last night, I must have missed them, because from what I recollect, you said very little about the MFC that had any substance.

Not that I like to agree with Caro, but if I hear one more comment about how well we train, I will .................................. What is now self-evident is that there is a massive disconnection/disengagement between players and off field administration, both Football Department and the Executive. We are told that we have to stay the course, that we are not sure exactly where the problem/s lie and we have to stick together. Nothing - yet - definitive has been stated by the Club. My only view is this. If you do not have the ability to identify the problem/s and draft a plan to combat the issues, then get out and let someone who does have a clue have a go. I am not talking about sackings, but some simply need to fall on their own swords, if they are unable to come up with anything that remotely is a strategic contingency plan. The lack of answers or solutions from the Club is just as worrying as the problems themselves. Admit the failings, speak out positively and show the paying members that you have a workable contingency plan. Don, playing a dead bat on a green top wicket is not the solution. Sorry for the cricket analogy, but I am sure you would not allow your own business to run like this, should your brand become so severely tarnished.

Muvver, why don't you just accept the spirit in which P-Man's post was written. Yours is mean spirited.